Under challenge in this original petition is Ext.P1 order dated 12.11.2014 whereby the Appellate Authority (LR), Thrissur was inclined to condone the delay of 208 days in filing the appeal. 2. The petitioner has procured a purchase certificate from the Land Tribunal in respect of 0.0607 II of dry land comprised in Survey No.564/2 of Kallur Thekkumuri Village of Mukundapuram Taluk.
3. The respondent herein preferred an appeal as A.A.No.51 of 2013. As the appeal was filed out of time, I.A.No.105 of 2013 was filed to condone the delay. In the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation petition, it was mentioned that on the last two sitting of the Land Tribunal, the then Vicar of the church could not present in court since he was residing at Wayanad and due to the duties attached to his post, he was unable to attend the court on all day. Since he did not O.P.(C). No.3003 of 2014 -: 2 :-
appear on the crucial date on which the case was disposed of, an ex parte order was passed by the Land Tribunal against the respondent church. Coming to know about the order he made arrangements to file an appeal against the ex parte order before the Appellate Authority (LR), Thrissur. It is contended that there was no willful laches on the part of the appellant before the appellate authority. It is also pointed out that unless the delay is condoned and the matter is heard on merits considerable loss and injury would be caused to the respondent.
4. The petitioner very strongly opposed the delay condonation petition before the Appellate Authority. It is contended that the reasons given are not at all sufficient to condone the delay.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the reasons given were all cooked up and there was laches on the part of the respondent in not filing the appeal within the stipulated time.
6. The lower appellate court after evaluation of the materials and after hearing both sides chose to condone the delay. Even assuming that there may be some infirmity in the O.P.(C). No.3003 of 2014 -: 3 :-
reason given for condonation of delay, since the decision of the appellate authority is to hear the appeal on merits, the petitioner can have no grievance. It is trite that every day's delay need not be meticulously explained. It is well settled that court should strive to dispose of matter on merit rather than dispose of the matter on technical grounds. Further, no injury or loss is caused to the petitioner by having the matter heard on merit.
It could not be said that the impugned order suffer from illegality, irregularity or impropriety warranting interference by this Court. The petition is without merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE.
Jvt